Triangle Regional Transit

[orulz]

Thanks, Yfreemark.

We should note that, according to the spin doctors, these are potential cuts, depending on how what the FTA thinks of TTA's cost-benefit analysis. TTA was trying to do everything the Right Way, but looks like they may have to make some real sacrifices this time.

• I wonder what they're going to change in downtown Raleigh. If it saves $12 million, it must be big. Are they going back to an elevated structure over the wye? The old plan called for a tunnel under Boylan Avenue and an open cut with a cap beneath the railroads.

• To be honest I'm not too worried about the loss of 10 cars - although it will only save $18.9 million on a $90.1 million contract. The plan called for linking two of the married pairs together, meaning that the trains would have been four cars long. Now, trains will be just 2 cars long. Honestly I doubt we'll need the extra space, at least for the first several years. They will still have the option of ordering more cars, too.

• The single-tracking for the last stations on the line probably means nothing more than not laying ballast, ties, and rail to the last station. They will probably (probably) build any bridges and make any fills or cuts large enough to accomodate that second track.

• Interlockings are not "Safety devices that keep trains from colliding at intersections." Interlockings are simply places where trains can cross from one track to the other.

• I wonder what happened to the idea of moving to wooden ties? They are much cheaper at the outset but it costs more to maintain since they must be replaced regularly.

[monsoon]

Though disappointing, I'm not opposed to these changes if it helps to get the train system approved. I get the feeling that the way money is being spent by the Federal govt and the huge deficits being run up, that stuff such as transit is going to get the short end of the stick.

[Subway Scoundrel]

Though disappointing, I'm not opposed to these changes if it helps to get the train system approved.  I get the feeling that the way money is being spent by the Federal govt and the huge deficits being run up, that stuff such as transit is going to get the short end of the stick.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree totally. While watching the weekend news shows and reading other media sources, it appears that transportation budget is the big thing aimed for cuts to help pay for Katrina. That and the Prescription drug Bill. Since the transportation bill has "pork" in it. (a definition of "Pork" is money spent on items not in your district ") This is where we need 2 senators who will fight for the money. Maybe not the best but the American Way

[ralex231]

I agree totally.    While watching the weekend news shows and reading other media sources, it appears that transportation budget is the big thing aimed for  cuts to help pay for Katrina.  That and the Prescription drug Bill.    Since the transportation bill has "pork" in it. (a definition of "Pork" is money spent on items not in your district ")    This is where we need 2 senators who will fight for the money.  Maybe not the best but the American Way 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i agree

[urbanesq]

^^ revenues of around $180 billion would be generated if even just a small portion of the Bush tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans were allowed to sunset-- i.e., if Congress chose NOT to make them permanent.

Call me crazy, but this seems to me a better approach than gutting our transportation budget.

[willrusso]

Have any of you guys heard about this? Maybe I'm just a little behind, but I had no idea that the major Triangle cities are planning on merging their transit systems. It seems like a great idea and would greatly improve the efficiency of traveling throughout the Triangle. Currently, there's CAT, DATA, TTA, and....whatever Chapel Hill transit is called. Cary's public transit system is laughable and almost non-existent to say the least. I wonder what this new system will be called? Perhaps TAT (Triangle Area Transit)? The direct link to the site is below.

http://www.triangleregiontransit.org/overview.html

[orulz]

Have any of you guys heard about this? ... the major Triangle cities are planning on merging their transit systems.

Actually this already went to a vote - and the bus systems decided not to completely merge. Instead, they agreed to take initiatives to build a more seamless system, with consolidation of efforts in paratransit, scheduling, marketing, and maintenence. Each bus system will remain remainin under the control of its respective city council, for now.

The big reason for this is that the cities want to try this out as they go along before committing to full consolidation. Although a central authority might be more efficient costwise, it could also create a bottleneck of authority where questions and requests go answered.

One reason that Chapel Hill turned down the full consolidation for now was that they were worried they wouldn't be able to run as many buses or respond to demand as easily in their popular and free system. On the flipside, the city of Raleigh doesn't run a whole lot of buses and they were afraid that they would be obligated to spend more money on transit as a result.

There's an article about this in the September 15th Herald-Sun.

[urbanesq]

I think this is a prime example of how the fact that we don

[yfreemark]

A new picture of the TTA Rail car:

Are orange and blue going to be the new colors? And why can't they get a graphic designer to make them a better looking logo?

[monsoon]

I am curious about this photo. Have they actually purchased cars without having a full funding letter or is this just a mockup?

[orulz]

A new picture of the TTA Rail car:

Are orange and blue going to be the new colors? And why can't they get a graphic designer to make them a better looking logo?

I guess this is the mock-up from the APTA expo in Dallas?

RE the logo, they will update it (and perhaps even ditch the TTA acronym entirely) as part of the branding before the rail system starts running.

The blue/orange version of their old logo was just a stopgap measure, because Burgundy/Forest Green looks like crap on stainless steel, and they had to come up with something to go on the mock-up in time for the APTA expo.

[yfreemark]

As far as I know, it's mockup.

It's from the board of trustees meeting agenda document.

[Eastwestrob]

I guess this is the mock-up from the APTA expo in Dallas?

RE the logo, they will update it (and perhaps even ditch the TTA acronym entirely) as part of the branding before the rail system starts running.

The blue/orange version of their old logo was just a stopgap measure, because Burgundy/Forest Green looks like crap on stainless steel, and they had to come up with something to go on the mock-up in time for the APTA expo.

If memory serves me correctly, The TTA ask people (Anybody artsy) to come up with a symbol for TTA and for artwork at each platform station. I have not seen what was submitted or approved so this may very well be just a mock-up. I can't imagine that symbol as the winner. This was about a year ago as I mentioned this to my sister (Art student) to submit but she declined.

[paletexan]

There will be a 5 part series on the feasibility of the rail project in the News & Observer coming this Sunday.

[ChiefJoJo]

A birdie told me today that the modeling effort for TTA is essentially complete at this point, and it looks like TTA did not achieve the ridership numbers they need to achieve a recommended rating and a FFGA this year from FTA.

I'm not sure how TTA will handle (or spin) this situation, but it's a HUGE setback once again. Unless the Triangle comes up with an alternate local funding source, it's most likely that major cuts will have to take place for the project to move forward.

[orulz]

I had read that the model was complete, and all that was left was the calibration and the final run to get the numbers. That was a while ago so they may very well be done.

So... Whee, let the axes fly!

But before they go ahead and chop all the future potential of this line up by taking out double-track sections and removing grade separations, I hope they take some time out and explore better local funding options. This rental tax just ain't working. Unfortunately, up until this point in time, NOBODY has been willing to touch the "third rail" of increased local funding. Seems like most transit advocates are resigned that an option sales tax would never fly in the Triangle. They're probably correct at this point, because there is a lot more exurban and rural land in Wake, Durham, and Orange than there is in Mecklenburg.

However, if they come with a sweeping plan and the right pitch, I think it can be done in a year or two. Hey, even the ruralites might dig it because it means denser development and more infill in the already-urbanized areas, and FEWER subdivisions out in the boonies.

[JunktionFET]

So what does this mean for the regional rail system? I'm a bit unclear as to how the FTA approves these projects. What criteria is evaluated with ridership in order to reach a decision? Does this mean that the projected cost of the system will have to be reduced in order to get approval? Or are the two variables completely unrelated? I'm sure there is no clear-cut answer anyway because it IS a government operation, and logic seldom follows such things.

If cost is reduced further, would that also affect projected ridership? As in, if train frequency is reduced and there are fewer stops, I would think that projected ridership would also drop.

Perhaps TTA should consider a more bare-bones system for now, just to get it flying. And yes, more local funding is a must. The sales tax thing is a great way to get it, but I doubt some of the more conservative minded bumpkins in the now-rural parts of Wake County would go for that.

[ChiefJoJo]

For more FTA info, see an earlier series of posts in this thread.

[JunktionFET]

So the newer stricter guidelines have also really put a damper on this thing getting approved? I had forgotten about that aspect of it. I wonder if the plan would get approved even if there was more local support for it.

[monsoon]

This is bad news for the TTA. The Feds adopted these new rules after the debacles with the Jacksonville skyway that nobody rides and the Burlington, VT commuter rail system that completely shutdown just a couple of years after the Feds paid for the thing. These new rules are designed to prevent a repeat of those mistakes.

It's also a result of a Republican congress and President who are generally anti-transit. Our local congress woman Sue Myrick

[DanRNC]

Speaking of that. Maybe there should be a shake up with the TTA too.

I think this is definitely warranted at this point. This whole thing has been an absolute fiasco. It doesn't help either that the Triangle has absolutely no political clout in Washington.

[Eastwestrob]

Well thats just great... now we have more money leftover on Capitol Hill to build another Bomb

[yfreemark]

What exactly would a "starter" system mean?

You can't really build a line from downtown Raleigh to RTP or from downtown Durham to RTP and expect it to work. In my opinion, we've got little choice but to pursue the system as it's designed right now. At the same time, I see little ability to cut down on the costs of the system - it's already been cut up so many times.

I see two major issues:

1. TTA is horrible at marketing itself. Its website provides basically no information compared to what similar transit agencies provide. It also has been unable to come up with any kind of long-term plan that might actually excite people. And it hasn't forced the issue of local funding. We spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year on the roads, and yet we're unable to make one major commitment for transit. That's pitiful, and partly TTA's fault for not making a bigger deal out of the issue.

2. We have a federal government that doesn't care about providing any money for transit. The FTA had to heighten its standards because the government has generally had to tighten its belt on all domestic expenses. It's depressing to think that even Houston, the 4th largest city in the country, cannot get the money for a second light rail line. This war has taken the life out of this nation's infrastructure.

It's particularly ironic that this news comes the day after Bush announced that we need to start considering alternatives to single-person commutes. Well thanks, George. How about some money for transit?

[monsoon]

An example of a starter system and as a comparison, Nashville is building a bare bones system that is costing less than $50 million dollars and because of that, they avoided the Federal gridlock that comes with these things. They are laying rails and painting logos on their trains now. This will be the first leg of an eventual regional commuter rail system in mid-Tenn. Having a running line goes a long way to prove or disprove local support.

I am not saying the TTA system should be cut back this much, and Nashville saved money by getting free used trains, but they are headed towards having a running commuter rail system after just a couple of years work as opposed to the TTA which is on its 12th year (or more) with no endpoint in sight.

There is more info on the Nashville system here and there is an UrbanPlanet thread devoted to this system in the Tennessee section.

[yfreemark]

Good point, monsoon.

I guess I was basing what I said on the assumption that the Triangle needed a system that was much more like light rail than commuter rail.

I was going through the N+O archives, and it seems to me that many of the problems with the TTA in the past have come from local government and organizations, not from the TTA itself. For instance, Duke derailed the project for a few months because of its refusal to allow a station as TTA's planners originally wanted (on an elevated platform across from the medical center). And Raleigh's leaders were generally anti-transit until Meeker's election. Also, it was difficult for TTA to negotiate with local railroads to use their tracks, which has made it necessary to build new tracks.

In terms of local funding, some discussions I've had with Durham leaders have indicated that it would be difficult to get a sales tax in this area because it's a regressive tax and our representatives in the house are generally too liberal to vote for such a tax.